Mental health services for people with intellectual disability: a conceptual framework.
Use the matrix model to spot gaps and compare mental-health services for clients with ID.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Geckeler et al. (2000) built a simple grid called the matrix model.
The grid lists every part of a mental-health service for people with ID.
It lets you line up two programs side-by-side and see what is missing.
What they found
The matrix shows six big pieces: who gets in, who gives care, what is done, where, how long, and how you know it works.
Each piece has smaller boxes you can tick or leave blank.
A full grid means the service is ready to run and easy to compare.
How this fits with other research
Glicksman et al. (2017) took the same pieces and added a new rule: balance rights with person-centered plans.
Chaplin et al. (2010) filled in the boxes with real numbers. They showed adults living alone use more outpatient visits.
Mason (2007) found clinicians often skip therapy if they feel unskilled. This warns you to add a clinician-training box to the matrix.
Palka Bayard de Volo et al. (2021) looked at depression signs in severe ID. Their list of red-flag behaviors fits neatly in the assessment row of the matrix.
Why it matters
Print a blank matrix before you start any new program. Tick every box you have. Empty boxes show gaps you must fix. Use it in team meetings to keep everyone clear on what the service offers and what it still needs.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Draw the six-column matrix on a whiteboard and tick the boxes for your current service.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The present paper discusses the application of the 'matrix model' to mental health services for people with intellectual disability. There is great variability between the service models in this area, which makes comparisons and conclusions difficult. The present model facilitates the breaking down of these complexities into understandable parts so that future directions for research, service planning and delivery can be logical, coherent and evidence-based.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2000 · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2788.2000.00283.x